lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [OOPS] 2.6.11 - NMI lockup with CFQ scheduler
From
Date
On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 14:22 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Do we really need the sdev_lock pointer? There's just a single place
> where we're using it and the code would be much more clear if it had just
> one name.

Humour me for a while. I don't believe we have any way the lock can be
used after calling queue free, but nulling the sdev_lock pointer will
surely catch them. If nothing turns up after a few kernel revisions,
feel free to kill it.

James


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-04-07 15:37    [W:0.049 / U:4.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site